Red-Shirt Rally Alert For Bangkok On Sunday

[Ricardo]

Indeed.

Please inform them that the shipment of new Red Shirt t-shirts have arrived from Montenegro... They're free for the most dedicated to this "democracy movement":

Does that new red-shirt come with a target painted on the back, to assist the black-shirt snipers, I wonder ?

well asiawatcher,i assume you are a expat living here in thailand as i am myself.My comment to your post is.This is their country and we as foreigners are only guests here.Therefore,they can protest or rally when and wherever they want (thais ) that is.If you don't like it go back to your own country.Nobody is keeping you here.

Personally I would agree absolutely, that they can (and do) exercise their right to peaceful-protest, but don't you also accept that we farang-onlookers also have our own right, to free-speech and comment upon the on-going situation ?

Or do you think we should humbly accept our role, as walking-ATMs, and abandon all our own human-rights when we come here ?

[slapout]

Granted its debatable, but humans are recognized as being at the top of the food chain due to their capability to reason, remember and think ahead. Those people who propose that those who immigrate to another country, thus should be expected to keep their thoughts/opinions to themselves or "go back from where you come" are more than likely the result of ancestor migration.

Maybe we could consider arrival evaluation, brain washing, if necessary, for any long term/permanent resident prior to clearing immigration. A partial lobotomy may be another option. How about a term in the local educational system for a open ended time frame?

There are tried and tested procedures for the minorities, majorities, and rebel rouses to get their ideas/ programs/solutions across to the general population. History indicates that the thoughts/input of several sources is more representative and provides more benefit to the masses than one individual and or those who have been subjected to paragraph two, as residences of the country.

[Buchholz]

What is the context of this email?

Who is Khun Boong and what celebration is under threat?

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/434884-chiangmai-friends/

Thanks for that lead.

Sheesh, that Chiang Mai Friends group and Khun Boong seem a bit off... at least based on that thread.

A subsequent search of the forum on those two turned up further bizarre or dubious stuff.

Amazes me that any ex-pat would associate with it, but c'est la vie.

[Buchholz]

Indeed.

Please inform them that the shipment of new Red Shirt t-shirts have arrived from Montenegro... They're free for the most dedicated to this "democracy movement":

Does that new red-shirt come with a target painted on the back, to assist the black-shirt snipers, I wonder ?

No, but it does come in a variety of children sizes from infant to toddler with an expressive "Human Shield" written on the back of those sizes.

[jdinasia]

maybe this is the reason the poor are so easily led

Recently released data from Thailand show clearly the relationship between poverty and education. According to the National Economic and Social Development Board, of the total number of poor people in 2002, 94.7 per cent had received only primary education or less. A further 2.8 per cent had lower secondary education, 1.7 per cent had upper secondary, 0.48 per cent had vocational qualifications and 0.31 per cent had graduated from universities. Thailandกฏs poor are overwhelmingly uneducated. They also tend to be rural and living in large families.

And who has allowed the education system to remain this way for decades..only those that will benefit from people being too thick to question what they do... This is maybe one of the things they believe they are fighting to change

Then again ---- The lot of the poor rural person, and education benefitted sooooooo much when Thaksin appointed himself Education Minister. (That is sarcasm in case you missed it.) Please note that the rural poor are by far NOT demonstrating in red shirts and apparently only those that have bought into Thaksin's lies are doing so. You don't see it as any kind of movement from most of the country. So maybe the reason the protesters are being so easily led is that they are being PAID to be led.

[jdinasia]

well asiawatcher,i assume you are a expat living here in thailand as i am myself.My comment to your post is.This is their country and we as foreigners are only guests here.Therefore,they can protest or rally when and wherever they want (thais ) that is.If you don't like it go back to your own country.Nobody is keeping you here.

Maybe that is how you see yourself. I am not merely a guest. I am a taxpayer and I certainly think that allows me to have an opinion and express it. Voting with your feet is always a choice, so is expressing yourself. One way offers no resistance and no encouragement, The other uses a bit of courage and creates dialogue (meaningful or not rather depends on whom you are speaking to.)

I would say that if you are unhappy, find something that makes you happy. That includes your living conditions. I, am more than just content living in Thailand, I am happy here. That doesn't mean that when I see an armed insurrectionist group marching in the streets, tossing and shooting grenades, and burning BKK that I am not saddened and angered. My partner works in an area very close to ratchaprasong and the actions of this violent criminal group put him at risk. "if you don't like it ...." phtttttt't't what a well reasoned argument

[webfact]

Democrats ask both Red and Yellow Shirts not to hold a rally next Tuesday

BANGKOK, January 22 2011 (NNT)-The Democrat Party has called on the Red Shirt and the Yellow Shirt demonstrators not to stage a rally next Tuesday for fears of violence. Democrat Spokesperson, Dr. Buranat Samutarak, said he fears both groups, who do not share common political beliefs, will clash with one another. He said the last thing he wants is for Thai people to turn against each other.

Dr. Buranat added that once the rallies turn to violence not only the innocence bystanders will get hurt but also the officials whose primary responsibility is to maintain peace for the protesters. He hoped that both sides will consider consulting with everyone involved and those who might be affected by their rallies in advance of their planned gathering next week.

The Spokesperson further stated that the government would be willing to assist in every way for the talks among all the stakeholders and the demonstrators to happen.

-- NNT 2011-01-22

[Emptyset]

I don't think so. Interesting, but you're probably reading too much into it. Some reds I spoke to were irritated that Sombat had suggested moving to Rajamangala Stadium, they said "how could we leave Ratchaprasong? Our friends died there," etc. Obviously they didn't literally die there, but that's the sentiment. I think it's just symbolic of those who died now, as is Kok Wua/Democracy Monument, that's why they're heading there after. Or do people think they're deliberately targeting Democ because of a grievance with the owners? I don't know why all this vitriol suddenly, when they've agreed to limit the rally there to two hours or so.

I have no idea how many actually died at Ratchaprasong intersection during the March - May 2010 protests. I would be surprised if it was even one. Lots here, lots there, total of 90/91, but at Ratchaprasong? I guess the place has been selected & made the symbol rather them being it on merit. Unless you want to count the torching of CTW, ZEN and BigC as merit making ?

I've made some parts of my original post bold, in case it wasn't clear the first time. But thanks for taking the time to expand on what I said.

[Emptyset]

Still remember when some red-shirt faction decided to do aerobics in Lumpini park instead of going to Ratchaprasong for fun. Pure coincidence that that same day we had a bomb explosion near BigC killing one, wounding a few others. Don't worry, those were non-red-shirts probably anyway.

If you're saying Sombat had something to do with that, or even coordinated with the bomber, why don't you pass your info on to the DSI? I'm sure they'd be very interested. However, he did announce he was going to rally in the park a several days before, and he also had his next few Sundays in parks IIRC. Not to mention he'd previously chosen parks as rally spaces. Not sure what you're implying in your last sentence? I'm sorry for anyone hurt or injured, regardless of their shirt colour. However, I don't think we should smear the peaceful majority by association. But it doesn't matter what I think. The fact is, red shirts aren't going to go away, so it's perhaps better to try to understand rather than demonize.

[rixalex]

The fact is, red shirts aren't going to go away, so it's perhaps better to try to understand rather than demonize.

One man's demonizing is another man's holding accountable.

[Emptyset]

OK, call me a stupid and ignorant farang. Until I read your post, I too thought that "protestors" were being paid to participate.

Billions were transferred to Thaksin's allies during Thailand's Red Crisis

But remember, Thaksin just said in an interview last week that he didn't support the red shirts and "I don't know them". So maybe you're right.

Your video shows people receiving money for transport. We all know that many protesters got there for free or were subsidized for fuel costs, although many also no doubt paid for their own transport.

Rice farmer Somanat Upala, 47, pawned his wife's gold jewellery to pay for living expenses and petrol for his pickup truck to drive the nearly 400 miles between the Red Shirts' camp in Bangkok's shopping centre and his little farm, where he returned every few weeks to tend his crops. "I haven't got the jewellery back yet, and won't until we get the money from the harvest," he said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/7753771/Defiant-Red-Shirts-go-back-to-their-home-villages.html

As for the billions, it's obvious Thaksin pumped money in, it would've taken a substantial amount of money even without assuming all the protesters were getting paid the thousands of baht some here say they did. However, didn't the DSI claim that the rally cost 150 billion baht? That sounds simply absurd to me. The total cost might be in the low billions, not necessarily all from Thaksin.

[Emptyset]

The fact is, red shirts aren't going to go away, so it's perhaps better to try to understand rather than demonize.

One man's demonizing is another man's holding accountable.

I think those guilty of criminal acts should be held accountable in the court of law, sure. I've never said anything different. And to my knowledge that's what's happening. People are getting caught for violent acts, and they're going to be tried for it. My argument is why smear those who've done nothing wrong? Incidentally, I've also never called for the leaders to be freed nor said all the red shirts are "political prisoners" or any of that nonsense.

[jayboy]

well asiawatcher,i assume you are a expat living here in thailand as i am myself.My comment to your post is.This is their country and we as foreigners are only guests here.Therefore,they can protest or rally when and wherever they want (thais ) that is.If you don't like it go back to your own country.Nobody is keeping you here.

Maybe that is how you see yourself. I am not merely a guest. I am a taxpayer and I certainly think that allows me to have an opinion and express it. Voting with your feet is always a choice, so is expressing yourself. One way offers no resistance and no encouragement, The other uses a bit of courage and creates dialogue (meaningful or not rather depends on whom you are speaking to.)

I would say that if you are unhappy, find something that makes you happy. That includes your living conditions. I, am more than just content living in Thailand, I am happy here. That doesn't mean that when I see an armed insurrectionist group marching in the streets, tossing and shooting grenades, and burning BKK that I am not saddened and angered. My partner works in an area very close to ratchaprasong and the actions of this violent criminal group put him at risk. "if you don't like it ...." phtttttt't't what a well reasoned argument

You overlook the fact that it was the army that gunned down innocent civilians.Some might wonder who exactly is the "violent criminal group", perhaps those who encouraged murder - the same group that encouraged and financed mayhem in 1976.Still it's becoming increasingly clear that many simply haven't bothered to understand the context of all this including the basic historical research.They might even understand why the reds have genuine and legitimate grievances.More important for these tossers to have unfettered access to the Sino - Thai emporiums, or swan aimlessly around Gaysorn.

[hanuman1]

The fact is, red shirts aren't going to go away, so it's perhaps better to try to understand rather than demonize.

One man's demonizing is another man's holding accountable.

I think those guilty of criminal acts should be held accountable in the court of law, sure. I've never said anything different. And to my knowledge that's what's happening. People are getting caught for violent acts, and they're going to be tried for it. My argument is why smear those who've done nothing wrong? Incidentally, I've also never called for the leaders to be freed nor said all the red shirts are "political prisoners" or any of that nonsense.

My argument is why smear those who've done nothing wrong?

But that's the anti-red-obsessives' whole point. Anyone who who puts on a red shirt and attends a rally IS wrong, and can therefore be smeared with all manner of tasteless and base accusations - usually revealing more about the accuser than the accused - like being a paid lackey, terrorist and even a person who happily uses their child as potential cannon fodder. All members of the redshirt movement are potentially like this according to some of the despicable characters that soil this forum.

Speaking of which, can someone do me a favor and let me know how to use the 'Ignore' function on this site? There's one asshol_e in particular I'd like never to have to suffer again, lest my subsequent outburst gets me banned.

And we wouldn't want that now would we SJ?

[jdinasia]

Maybe that is how you see yourself. I am not merely a guest. I am a taxpayer and I certainly think that allows me to have an opinion and express it. Voting with your feet is always a choice, so is expressing yourself. One way offers no resistance and no encouragement, The other uses a bit of courage and creates dialogue (meaningful or not rather depends on whom you are speaking to.)

I would say that if you are unhappy, find something that makes you happy. That includes your living conditions. I, am more than just content living in Thailand, I am happy here. That doesn't mean that when I see an armed insurrectionist group marching in the streets, tossing and shooting grenades, and burning BKK that I am not saddened and angered. My partner works in an area very close to ratchaprasong and the actions of this violent criminal group put him at risk. "if you don't like it ...." phtttttt't't what a well reasoned argument

You overlook the fact that it was the army that gunned down innocent civilians.Some might wonder who exactly is the "violent criminal group", perhaps those who encouraged murder - the same group that encouraged and financed mayhem in 1976.Still it's becoming increasingly clear that many simply haven't bothered to understand the context of all this including the basic historical research.They might even understand why the reds have genuine and legitimate grievances.More important for these tossers to have unfettered access to the Sino - Thai emporiums, or swan aimlessly around Gaysorn.

No,

Actually I didn't overlook who escalated violence. It was the reds. The violent criminal group is also the reds. It is obvious to some that some people will make any excuse for the reds, including them being armed with m79 grenade launchers and assault-rifle (and pretend that they didn't announce their plans for the burning from stages MONTHS in advance.) Some people will take 30+ years ago out of context and ignore Jaran and others openly discussing the Maoist tactics they employ in the red shirt movement.

Red's legitimate grievances? None.

Legitimate grievances of the rural poor in Thailand? Many.

Jayboy's oversimplifications of who are businessmen in Thailand, To avoid that oversimplification let's just say: Thai, Chinese-Thai, Foreign, Indo-Thai, and any other ethnic mix with Thai .....

It is becoming increasingly clear that some people will do or say anything to lay this at the feet of someone that they hate and NOT look at the violence as it escalated in April and beyond. (Did the army start the violence at the regiment? No) Did the army start the violence at ThaiCom? No ..... but hey --- instead of blaming the armed insurgents in BKK, let's blame someone else !

edit to refine the initial response ---- the army gunned down innocent civilians? Nope. They most probably killed some unarmed people. Innocent civilians? Nope.

Edited January 22, 2011 by jdinasia

[whybother]

<snip>

More important for these tossers to have unfettered access to the Sino - Thai emporiums

<snip>

... for the quote nazi's out there, my bolding.

[jdinasia]

hmmm Hanuman ---- who exactly is SJ? and who are you posting the majority of your post to?

If you are part of a movement that uses violence in your name, then you are simply complicit in what they do in your name. If you take their money or if you donate your own money, you are part of a conspiracy. If you go to BKK to join the rally in Mar/Apr/May AFTER hearing Arsiaman's impassioned pleas for people to bring 1,000,000.00 bottles to fill with gasoline to burn BKK down and still go ... you are complicit. If you STAY after armed men in your midst kill, you are complicit. If you hear them talk about the generals and soldiers that will come kill for you, you are complicit.

There were no innocent civilians amongst those wearing red in BKK after April 10th, and most were not innocent civilians before then.

[jayboy]

Actually I didn't overlook who escalated violence. It was the reds. The violent criminal group is also the reds. It is obvious to some that some people will make any excuse for the reds, including them being armed with m79 grenade launchers and assault-rifle (and pretend that they didn't announce their plans for the burning from stages MONTHS in advance.) Some people will take 30+ years ago out of context and ignore Jaran and others openly discussing the Maoist tactics they employ in the red shirt movement.

Red's legitimate grievances? None.

Your remark about taking events 30 years ago "out of context" is more revealing than you might think.It's becoming clear that many on this forum simply haven't got to grips with Thailand's recent history.Your fatuous remark that the reds have no grievances is in direct contradiction to statements from Abhisit, Korn and others, a comment so crass from you it doesn't deserve a reply.So wallow in your fantasy world of "Maoist" tactics, and prance around Ratchprasong to your hearts content.

[bubba]

well asiawatcher,i assume you are a expat living here in thailand as i am myself.My comment to your post is.This is their country and we as foreigners are only guests here.Therefore,they can protest or rally when and wherever they want (thais ) that is.If you don't like it go back to your own country.Nobody is keeping you here.

Maybe that is how you see yourself. I am not merely a guest. I am a taxpayer and I certainly think that allows me to have an opinion and express it. Voting with your feet is always a choice, so is expressing yourself. One way offers no resistance and no encouragement, The other uses a bit of courage and creates dialogue (meaningful or not rather depends on whom you are speaking to.)

I would say that if you are unhappy, find something that makes you happy. That includes your living conditions. I, am more than just content living in Thailand, I am happy here. That doesn't mean that when I see an armed insurrectionist group marching in the streets, tossing and shooting grenades, and burning BKK that I am not saddened and angered. My partner works in an area very close to ratchaprasong and the actions of this violent criminal group put him at risk. "if you don't like it ...." phtttttt't't what a well reasoned argument

You overlook the fact that it was the army that gunned down innocent civilians.

I don't suppose some of those "innocent civilians" might have been among these peaceful protestors?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgl_cgEmzxA

[jdinasia]

Actually I didn't overlook who escalated violence. It was the reds. The violent criminal group is also the reds. It is obvious to some that some people will make any excuse for the reds, including them being armed with m79 grenade launchers and assault-rifle (and pretend that they didn't announce their plans for the burning from stages MONTHS in advance.) Some people will take 30+ years ago out of context and ignore Jaran and others openly discussing the Maoist tactics they employ in the red shirt movement.

Red's legitimate grievances? None.

Your remark about taking events 30 years ago "out of context" is more revealing than you might think.It's becoming clear that many on this forum simply haven't got to grips with Thailand's recent history.Your fatuous remark that the reds have no grievances is in direct contradiction to statements from Abhisit, Korn and others, a comment so crass from you it doesn't deserve a reply.So wallow in your fantasy world of "Maoist" tactics, and prance around Ratchprasong to your hearts content.

Jaran --- a redshirt leader talked about the Maoist tactics (he didn't have to but freely did)

Abhisit and Korn have to appeal to the rural poor that identify with the reds. I don't. The reds have no legitimate grievances, the rural poor do. I can make the distinction when a politician cannot.

You can wallow in your fantasy world of "Sino-Thai" supremacy in Thailand and prance around Rachaprasong with the reds to your heart's content. Personally, I'll avoid the area, and anywhere else I think that the reds have an illegitimate grievance with the people there since I don't want to be on the receiving end of an m79 attack.

(and yes you neatly sidestepped that it was in fact, none other than the reds that escalated the violence ... shame.

[hanuman1]

hmmm Hanuman ---- who exactly is SJ? and who are you posting the majority of your post to?

If you are part of a movement that uses violence in your name, then you are simply complicit in what they do in your name. If you take their money or if you donate your own money, you are part of a conspiracy. If you go to BKK to join the rally in Mar/Apr/May AFTER hearing Arsiaman's impassioned pleas for people to bring 1,000,000.00 bottles to fill with gasoline to burn BKK down and still go ... you are complicit. If you STAY after armed men in your midst kill, you are complicit. If you hear them talk about the generals and soldiers that will come kill for you, you are complicit.

There were no innocent civilians amongst those wearing red in BKK after April 10th, and most were not innocent civilians before then.

The US government, whose responsibility it is to represent US citizens abroad, was complicit in the well-documented deaths of numerous innocent civilians abroad. You gave them money via your tax dollars. Does that make you complicit in those deaths? I wouldn't say so, although some more narrow-minded people would, even though those actions were part of a clearly defined strategy.

The violence that took place last year in BKK was partly fueled by the rhetoric coming from the red stage, and those people responsible for that should rightly be brought to justice. It could hardly be said that violence was part of any official policy of the red shirt movement outside of that time not just because it hasn't occurred since (at rallies anyway) but because, as we have all found in subsequent months, we see precious few 'official policies' of any nature coming out of the red shirt movement at all.

Thus your connection between the violence carried out by a relatively small number of radical criminals and the thousands of non-violent attendees whose legal culpability in that violence isn't even suggested by any Thai authority, is misguided and in my opinion potentially devisive.

Edited January 22, 2011 by hanuman1

[Emptyset]

But that's the anti-red-obsessives' whole point. Anyone who who puts on a red shirt and attends a rally IS wrong, and can therefore be smeared with all manner of tasteless and base accusations - usually revealing more about the accuser than the accused - like being a paid lackey, terrorist and even a person who happily uses their child as potential cannon fodder. All members of the redshirt movement are potentially like this according to some of the despicable characters that soil this forum.

Sadly, it seems so. Anyway, there's no point people here continually saying that red shirts have no real grievances. They're convinced they do, and that's all that matters in terms of what happens. I'm not sure what the way forward is, but it'll certainly require an election and a compromise from both sides. That's why it's crucial that the moderates stay involved with the red shirts, because if they leave, the hardcore will remain, only even more frustrated than now. And the results could be quite terrible, one way or another. But moderates can lead them away from violence and show them there's still a peaceful, constructive path.

[Emptyset]

The violence that took place last year in BKK was partly fueled by the rhetoric coming from the red stage, and those people responsible for that should rightly be brought to justice. It could hardly be said that violence was part of any official policy of the red shirt movement outside of that time not just because it hasn't occurred since but because, as we have all found in subsequent months, we see precious few 'official policies' of any nature coming out of the red shirt movement at all.

Thus your connection between the violence carried out by a relatively small number of radical criminals and the thousands of non-violent attendees whose legal culpability in that violence isn't even suggested by any Thai authority, is misguided and in my opinion potentially devisive.

Well said.

[jdinasia]

The violence that took place last year in BKK was partly fueled by the rhetoric coming from the red stage, and those people responsible for that should rightly be brought to justice. It could hardly be said that violence was part of any official policy of the red shirt movement outside of that time not just because it hasn't occurred since but because, as we have all found in subsequent months, we see precious few 'official policies' of any nature coming out of the red shirt movement at all.

Thus your connection between the violence carried out by a relatively small number of radical criminals and the thousands of non-violent attendees whose legal culpability in that violence isn't even suggested by any Thai authority, is misguided and in my opinion potentially devisive.

Well said.

Which completely ignores the red mob in 2007, 2008, 2009 ...........

Which completely ignores that it was the redshirts LEADERS calling for violence from the stage and warning of guerilla tactics to come ...

Which completely ignores Seh Daeng and his Ronin.

Which completely ignore the destruction at the apartment block in Nonthaburi

Which completely ignore the attacks in Chiang Mai .....

Culpability is assigned how the party in power and the attny's of the government assigns it. It is certainly in their best interest not to pursue more serious charges against those who were playing a supporting role. It may be politically divisive but it is certainly within the realm of precedence (strangely legal precedence is not important in Thailand, allowing each case to be decided on its own merits and not based upon what happened in other cases ....)

Which completely ignores the arrests and confessions for some of the above ....

[jdinasia]

Sadly, it seems so. Anyway, there's no point people here continually saying that red shirts have no real grievances. They're convinced they do, and that's all that matters in terms of what happens. I'm not sure what the way forward is, but it'll certainly require an election and a compromise from both sides. That's why it's crucial that the moderates stay involved with the red shirts, because if they leave, the hardcore will remain, only even more frustrated than now. And the results could be quite terrible, one way or another. But moderates can lead them away from violence and show them there's still a peaceful, constructive path.

Erroneous conclusion --- if the moderates leave, divorce themselves from Thaksin and his violent henchmen (the red leaders) and decide to instead work with ANY other group or form a new one. THEN they can have some credibility. You might actually get a groundswell of moderates of all types that would see a group like that as a way out of this polarized mess. The problem is you must denounce the violence of the reds to be even remotely considered moderate (you can renounce the army and PAD in the same breath but without renouncing the violence and violent rhetoric of the red leaders there can be no growth.)

[hanuman1]

The violence that took place last year in BKK was partly fueled by the rhetoric coming from the red stage, and those people responsible for that should rightly be brought to justice. It could hardly be said that violence was part of any official policy of the red shirt movement outside of that time not just because it hasn't occurred since but because, as we have all found in subsequent months, we see precious few 'official policies' of any nature coming out of the red shirt movement at all.

Thus your connection between the violence carried out by a relatively small number of radical criminals and the thousands of non-violent attendees whose legal culpability in that violence isn't even suggested by any Thai authority, is misguided and in my opinion potentially devisive.

Well said.

Which completely ignores the red mob in 2007, 2008, 2009 ...........

Which completely ignores that it was the redshirts LEADERS calling for violence from the stage and warning of guerilla tactics to come ...

Which completely ignores Seh Daeng and his Ronin.

Which completely ignore the destruction at the apartment block in Nonthaburi

Which completely ignore the attacks in Chiang Mai .....

Culpability is assigned how the party in power and the attny's of the government assigns it. It is certainly in their best interest not to pursue more serious charges against those who were playing a supporting role. It may be politically divisive but it is certainly within the realm of precedence (strangely legal precedence is not important in Thailand, allowing each case to be decided on its own merits and not based upon what happened in other cases ....)

Which completely ignores the arrests and confessions for some of the above ....

I was replying to specific aspects of your post. Forgive me, but I can't help ignoring issues that haven't even been brought up in the context of the discussion I'm engaged in at any given time. I also ignored the plight of the Inuits during these times of advanced globalization. Sorry.

I'm not very knowledgeable about all the things you correctly accuse me of ignoring, so I won't offer a potentially ill-informed opinion on them. As for Sah Daeng, and explosions in Nonthaburi and Chiang Mai, I still fail to see how thousands of redshirted protesters who have never been suspected or accused of any illegality by any recognizable authority could have had as direct a role in those actions as you keep implying.

Edited January 22, 2011 by hanuman1

[yoshiwara]

The violence that took place last year in BKK was partly fueled by the rhetoric coming from the red stage, and those people responsible for that should rightly be brought to justice. It could hardly be said that violence was part of any official policy of the red shirt movement outside of that time not just because it hasn't occurred since but because, as we have all found in subsequent months, we see precious few 'official policies' of any nature coming out of the red shirt movement at all.

Thus your connection between the violence carried out by a relatively small number of radical criminals and the thousands of non-violent attendees whose legal culpability in that violence isn't even suggested by any Thai authority, is misguided and in my opinion potentially devisive.

Well said.

Which completely ignores the red mob in 2007, 2008, 2009 ...........

Which completely ignores that it was the redshirts LEADERS calling for violence from the stage and warning of guerilla tactics to come ...

Which completely ignores Seh Daeng and his Ronin.

Which completely ignore the destruction at the apartment block in Nonthaburi

Which completely ignore the attacks in Chiang Mai .....

Culpability is assigned how the party in power and the attny's of the government assigns it. It is certainly in their best interest not to pursue more serious charges against those who were playing a supporting role. It may be politically divisive but it is certainly within the realm of precedence (strangely legal precedence is not important in Thailand, allowing each case to be decided on its own merits and not based upon what happened in other cases ....)

Which completely ignores the arrests and confessions for some of the above ....

Thaksin has the reds conveniently labelled in different layers of an onion, so that when violence occurs he (and the red apologists) can disclaim responsibility for any of the actions undertaken by the other reds. However, if anybody is under any illusion that all the different elements do anything other than lead back to Thaksin's control then dream on. And if anybody thinks that the so-called peaceful reds calling for the freedom of their terrorist leaders are some form of innocent crowd then pull the other one. The disclaimer of responsibility tactic evolved from the faintly farcical Thaksin attempt t.o label the 2009 rioters as 'fake reds'. Everybody knew he was openly lying, so now the game is to pretend that 'that lot' are not really part of the team but yes they are reds. Meally-mouthed obfuscation yes, but enough for the forum red team to push the 'genuine grievances' junk one more time.

[Buchholz]

The violence that took place last year in BKK was partly fueled by the rhetoric coming from the red stage, and those people responsible for that should rightly be brought to justice. It could hardly be said that violence was part of any official policy of the red shirt movement outside of that time not just because it hasn't occurred since but because, as we have all found in subsequent months, we see precious few 'official policies' of any nature coming out of the red shirt movement at all.

Thus your connection between the violence carried out by a relatively small number of radical criminals and the thousands of non-violent attendees whose legal culpability in that violence isn't even suggested by any Thai authority, is misguided and in my opinion potentially devisive.

Well said.

Which completely ignores the red mob in 2007, 2008, 2009 ...........

Which completely ignores that it was the redshirts LEADERS calling for violence from the stage and warning of guerilla tactics to come ...

Which completely ignores Seh Daeng and his Ronin.

Which completely ignore the destruction at the apartment block in Nonthaburi

Which completely ignore the attacks in Chiang Mai .....

Culpability is assigned how the party in power and the attny's of the government assigns it. It is certainly in their best interest not to pursue more serious charges against those who were playing a supporting role. It may be politically divisive but it is certainly within the realm of precedence (strangely legal precedence is not important in Thailand, allowing each case to be decided on its own merits and not based upon what happened in other cases ....)

Which completely ignores the arrests and confessions for some of the above ....

Thaksin has the reds conveniently labelled in different layers of an onion, so that when violence occurs he (and the red apologists) can disclaim responsibility for any of the actions undertaken by the other reds. However, if anybody is under any illusion that all the different elements do anything other than lead back to Thaksin's control then dream on. And if anybody thinks that the so-called peaceful reds calling for the freedom of their terrorist leaders are some form of innocent crowd then pull the other one. The disclaimer of responsibility tactic evolved from the faintly farcical Thaksin attempt t.o label the 2009 rioters as 'fake reds'. Everybody knew he was openly lying, so now the game is to pretend that 'that lot' are not really part of the team but yes they are reds. Meally-mouthed obfuscation yes, but enough for the forum red team to push the 'genuine grievances' junk one more time.

Well said.

[jdinasia]

Which completely ignores the red mob in 2007, 2008, 2009 ...........

Which completely ignores that it was the redshirts LEADERS calling for violence from the stage and warning of guerilla tactics to come ...

Which completely ignores Seh Daeng and his Ronin.

Which completely ignore the destruction at the apartment block in Nonthaburi

Which completely ignore the attacks in Chiang Mai .....

Culpability is assigned how the party in power and the attny's of the government assigns it. It is certainly in their best interest not to pursue more serious charges against those who were playing a supporting role. It may be politically divisive but it is certainly within the realm of precedence (strangely legal precedence is not important in Thailand, allowing each case to be decided on its own merits and not based upon what happened in other cases ....)

Which completely ignores the arrests and confessions for some of the above ....

I was replying to specific aspects of your post. Forgive me, but I can't help ignoring issues that haven't even been brought up in the context of the discussion I'm engaged in at any given time. I also ignored the plight of the Inuits during these times of advanced globalization. Sorry.

I'm not very knowledgeable about all the things you correctly accuse me of ignoring, so I won't offer a potentially ill-informed opinion on them. As for Sah Daeng, and explosions in Nonthaburi and Chiang Mai, I still fail to see how thousands of redshirted protesters who have never been suspected or accused of any illegality by any recognizable authority could have had as direct a role in those actions as you keep implying.

If you KNOW the history of the Reds ...... If you KNOW Seh Daeng proclaimed there would be grenade attacks that then happened .... If you KNOW Arisaman told people to bring empty bottle to the BKK rally to fill with gasoline and you went, you aren't innocent. (Nonthaburi came afterwards so would only apply later). The reds were violent from the beginning. They were the agents for Samak to declare the SoE in 2008. The people you hold "not culpable" were there with the armed reds intermingling with them (and their leaders spoke of them) .... yet they chose to remain in defiance of a lawful order to disperse. Not an innocent in the bunch other than the children used as human shields at the barricades.

If you don't know the history of the reds... the violence .. the lies .... then comment at this point might be premature on your part Hanuman. (BTW --- there used to be a member that also claimed he wasn't pro-red and only spoke out as balance ... ) The issue was he was never balanced at all ....

The red violence started in 2007 .... to deny knowledge of the violence assumes that other posters are very naive, or that your ignorance (note --- meant ONLY as self-professed lack of knowledge --- not in any way directed at your intelligence) is either a pretense or rather severe.

[hanuman1]

Which completely ignores the red mob in 2007, 2008, 2009 ...........

Which completely ignores that it was the redshirts LEADERS calling for violence from the stage and warning of guerilla tactics to come ...

Which completely ignores Seh Daeng and his Ronin.

Which completely ignore the destruction at the apartment block in Nonthaburi

Which completely ignore the attacks in Chiang Mai .....

Culpability is assigned how the party in power and the attny's of the government assigns it. It is certainly in their best interest not to pursue more serious charges against those who were playing a supporting role. It may be politically divisive but it is certainly within the realm of precedence (strangely legal precedence is not important in Thailand, allowing each case to be decided on its own merits and not based upon what happened in other cases ....)

Which completely ignores the arrests and confessions for some of the above ....

I was replying to specific aspects of your post. Forgive me, but I can't help ignoring issues that haven't even been brought up in the context of the discussion I'm engaged in at any given time. I also ignored the plight of the Inuits during these times of advanced globalization. Sorry.

I'm not very knowledgeable about all the things you correctly accuse me of ignoring, so I won't offer a potentially ill-informed opinion on them. As for Sah Daeng, and explosions in Nonthaburi and Chiang Mai, I still fail to see how thousands of redshirted protesters who have never been suspected or accused of any illegality by any recognizable authority could have had as direct a role in those actions as you keep implying.

If you KNOW the history of the Reds ...... If you KNOW Seh Daeng proclaimed there would be grenade attacks that then happened .... If you KNOW Arisaman told people to bring empty bottle to the BKK rally to fill with gasoline and you went, you aren't innocent. (Nonthaburi came afterwards so would only apply later). The reds were violent from the beginning. They were the agents for Samak to declare the SoE in 2008. The people you hold "not culpable" were there with the armed reds intermingling with them (and their leaders spoke of them) .... yet they chose to remain in defiance of a lawful order to disperse. Not an innocent in the bunch other than the children used as human shields at the barricades.

If you don't know the history of the reds... the violence .. the lies .... then comment at this point might be premature on your part Hanuman. (BTW --- there used to be a member that also claimed he wasn't pro-red and only spoke out as balance ... ) The issue was he was never balanced at all ....

The red violence started in 2007 .... to deny knowledge of the violence assumes that other posters are very naive, or that your ignorance (note --- meant ONLY as self-professed lack of knowledge --- not in any way directed at your intelligence) is either a pretense or rather severe.

It appears that my level of knowledge precludes any chance of a sustained discussion with you. I won't waste any more of your time.